Juries

Question	Answer
juror qualifications	between aged 18-70 registered to vote Uk resident for over 5 years since the age of 13 NOT MENTALLY DISORDERED
Disqualifications of a juror PERMANATELY	life imprisonment imprisoned for public protection serving an extended sentence serving a 5 year or more prison sentance
DISQUALIFICATIONS FOR 10 YEARS	if at any time in the last 10 years: served a prison sentance has a suspended sentance passed on to them has a community order is on bail
Excusal	people who have served jury service in the last 2 years full time members of the force and if they are absent it can affect the efficiency of the service
Deferrals (discretionary excusals)	those who cannot carry out jury service at that moment in time can be excused until a later date for example due to: illness Work commitments holiday commitments Exams involvement in case
jury sevice fines? discharged?	failure to attend court can lead to fines of a maximum of £1000 jurors can claim for loss of earnings and travel expenses people who have insufficient understanding of English can be discharged people with a physical disability can be discahrged
Selection process	at the crown court there is an official responsible for this process names are selected at random from the electoral register this is done through a computer selection at a central office
selection at court	juries are divided into groups of 15 and allocated to the court Clerk will choose 12 out of these 15 there is a special power called 'praying a tailsmen' to select any qualified person to be a juror from the streets, if there are not enough jurors present
To the array challenge	To the array- prosecution and Defence. challenge to the whole jury on the basis that it is unrepresentative/bias E.g- R V Fraser 1987. D was of EMB and the whole jury was white. jury was replaced
challenge- For cause	both prosecution and Defence can use this challenge. this is against certain individual. a valid reason must be given as to why the juror cannot sit e.g.- physically disabled in case R V Wilson 1995, the wife of a prison officer was summoned and was not excused. the D's were convicted of robbery and were at the prison where the women's husband worked. the CoA quashed the conviction
Prosecution's right to standby jurors	Prosecution only right. allows the prosecution to put a juror at the end of the list so they will not be used unless there aren't enough jurors. this power shall be used sparingly.
Critisims of selection	the electoral register- this may not guve a representative sample of society as not everyone registers to vote eg the homeless multi-racial jurors- wether this is desirable for when the D or victim is of an EMB Disqualified jurors- may still sit on jury excusals- too many discretionary excusals can lead to an unrepresentative jury the P right to standby jurors- might be seen as giving the prosecution an advantage in rigging the jury.
When to use a jury?	Crown court- in serious criminal cases. juries decide whether the D is guilty or not !2 jurors are used High/ County court- Defamation, False imprisonment, Malicious prosecution and any fraud case. the jury must decide liability and the amount of damages awarded. 12/8 jurors used Coroners court- violent/unknown causes death. death of person in police custody. the jury shall decide the cause of death. 7-11 jurors used
ROLE OF A JURY	TO DETERMINE ISSUES OF FACT, NOT LAW the judge sums up the facts of the case and explains the laws to the jury. MUST BE A UNANIMOUS VERDICT
What act sets out the rules for when a jury is used in civil cases?	s69 of Supreme Court Act 1981 for hight court cases s66 of County Courts Act for county court cases
Advantages of a jury	using ordinary people creates public confidence in the legal system as the decision made is fair random cross section of society so fair decision made law is explained in simple terms so it is clear, open and accessible 12 opinions are taken into consideration so fair non bias as 12 jurors are used no direct interest in case, and are not involved A jury can refuse to operate a unjust law. eg in Pontings case 1985
disadvantages of a jury	More expensive that trial at magistrates court takes much longer as law needs to be explained to jury unknown whether jury understood case or not as they do not need to give reasons for decisions made jury can be influences by good advocacy rather than facts some jurors may become bored and rush the decision risk of 'jury nobbling' media coverage can cause jurors to form a biased view and so the trial is not fair perverse decisions can be made where the jurors can refuse to convict/acquit D in clear cut case.
Bushells case 1670	judge cannot interfere with jury's verdict even if he disagrees with it. the judge tried to imprison a jury that refused to convict a D.
R V Young 1995	Extraneous materials cannot be used by jury. the jury used a ouija board to convict D. Later, the conviction was quashed.
R V Taylor & Taylor	influence of media on jury can lead to injustice for D. two sisters were convicted of murder but the newspaper gave a false impression of what happened which may have influenced the juries decision. the CoA quashed the conviction.
R V Mirza	the HoL ruled that it could not inquire into discussions of jury room. D was convicted but later it was known that an interpretor was used as a ploy.
R V Ponting	Ponting was a civil servant who leaked information to MP. the jury refused to find him guilty even though he clearly was

Next up

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by suhaila sacranie almost 8 years ago